It’s not a Linux distro. It is an opensource reimplementation of the NT kernel and Win32 userspace.
I could see it being useful, if you have a Windows application that runs on ReactOS and you want to save licensing costs (especially if you think of large scale deployments) or it doesn’t run on newer Windows versions, but you still want a supported operating system. It is also useful, if you rely on Windows drivers for the hardware, as they should work just fine on ReactOS.
You could also use it as a baseline for your own NT OS, e. g. to compete with Microsoft (if you’re brave enough …). Or you could set up container clusters with an NT base, if you develop container tools for it. :D
I actually wanted to use it once for a VM, but my application didn’t run on ReactOS.
I think we miss out on the true potential, because development is just way too slow and there is no release cycle, upgrade path or guaranteed updates at the moment.
You’ve never run into obscure but vital software being run on old and unsupported versions of windows that also can’t be moved to newer hardware. It’s a niche use case, but when you consider that includes some medical equipment, that niche is way more important than it seems. There’s still plenty of things running custom software that can’t be changed without a fully rebuilt program that could cost enough to make it impossible for smaller organizations to feasibly do so.
Besides, it isn’t like this project takes anything away from any others. The devs wouldn’t just magically shift to something less niche. If they were interested in something else, they’d already be doing it. Whatever they might move to would also be a niche interest.
Analogue: Why have more than one text editor when vi already exists? There’s no reason for any of the others to keep on going.
Yes, there are other ways of getting Windows software to run under other operating systems; WINE being the main one, but also virtualisation, building from source, or - loosely - substituting for similar. There’s only one that aims to be an OS in its own right.
You might call ReactOS the Emacs of Windows emulation. Everything else is just a text editor.
Eheheheh…heh…
…eh.
All “casual mockery” aside… do we really need a Linux distro that is 1/1 par with Windows? Is there anything that would benefit from this?
It’s not a Linux distro. It is an opensource reimplementation of the NT kernel and Win32 userspace.
I could see it being useful, if you have a Windows application that runs on ReactOS and you want to save licensing costs (especially if you think of large scale deployments) or it doesn’t run on newer Windows versions, but you still want a supported operating system. It is also useful, if you rely on Windows drivers for the hardware, as they should work just fine on ReactOS.
You could also use it as a baseline for your own NT OS, e. g. to compete with Microsoft (if you’re brave enough …). Or you could set up container clusters with an NT base, if you develop container tools for it. :D
I actually wanted to use it once for a VM, but my application didn’t run on ReactOS.
I think we miss out on the true potential, because development is just way too slow and there is no release cycle, upgrade path or guaranteed updates at the moment.
It isn’t a Linux distro. Its built from the ground up
Oh. My point still stands however – I (honestly) see zero purpose/reason for this project to keep on going.
You’ve never run into obscure but vital software being run on old and unsupported versions of windows that also can’t be moved to newer hardware. It’s a niche use case, but when you consider that includes some medical equipment, that niche is way more important than it seems. There’s still plenty of things running custom software that can’t be changed without a fully rebuilt program that could cost enough to make it impossible for smaller organizations to feasibly do so.
Besides, it isn’t like this project takes anything away from any others. The devs wouldn’t just magically shift to something less niche. If they were interested in something else, they’d already be doing it. Whatever they might move to would also be a niche interest.
Analogue: Why have more than one text editor when
vialready exists? There’s no reason for any of the others to keep on going.Yes, there are other ways of getting Windows software to run under other operating systems; WINE being the main one, but also virtualisation, building from source, or - loosely - substituting for similar. There’s only one that aims to be an OS in its own right.
You might call ReactOS the Emacs of Windows emulation. Everything else is just a text editor.